Author
Listed:
- Andrea Loacker
(University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Institute of Sustainable Economic Development)
- Erwin Schmid
(University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Institute of Sustainable Economic Development)
- Hermine Mitter
(University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Institute of Sustainable Economic Development)
Abstract
Actors use different frames to advance their interests in agricultural policy-making processes. Five frames and 25 subframes have been identified by a qualitative content analysis of 1,155 newspaper articles in Austria’s largest agricultural newspaper Bauernzeitung during the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform process 2013. However, it remains unclear which actors make selective or repeated use of the identified frames and subframes and who forms a coalition with other actors along their policy core beliefs in order to influence agricultural policies. Therefore, we link the Advocacy Coalition Framework with frame analysis to explore actors’ frames and advocacy coalitions in the CAP reform process 2013. Our results show that the actors can be divided into two advocacy coalitions, namely the Agricultural Coalition and the Environmental Coalition. The Agricultural Coalition mainly uses the social balance subframe, the national politics subframe, the negotiation subframe, and the financial regulations subframe. The Environmental Coalition mainly uses the societal concerns frame and its associated subframes. Journalists act as policy brokers and use almost all subframes. The results accentuate that media are a welcome device to participate in agricultural policy-making processes and provide useful insights for a diverse group of CAP actors on how to target their communication strategy.
Suggested Citation
Andrea Loacker & Erwin Schmid & Hermine Mitter, 2025.
"Actors’ frames and advocacy coalitions in the CAP reform process 2013 in Austria’s agricultural media,"
Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 42(3), pages 1497-1519, September.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:42:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-024-10689-7
DOI: 10.1007/s10460-024-10689-7
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:agrhuv:v:42:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s10460-024-10689-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.